I’m often asked to help leaders motivate employees because productivity, quality, attitudes and morale are low.  Leaders typically assume that unhappy employees are the problem, and making them happier – with team-building, money, perks or more involvement in decision-making - is the solution. That might seem like good sense but the answer doesn’t lie in accommodation, appeasement or consensus involving the most demanding employees.

To read the rest of this article from the East Bay Business Times, see: You can't make all employees happy -- and shouldn't try http://eastbay.bizjournals.com/eastbay/stories/2004/08/16/smallb6.html

The key isn’t being nicer; the key is leaders leading and followers following.

It’s true that many employees and managers will be more productive when they are treated the way they want.  But it’s equally true that many will enjoy their jobs only if they don’t have to be productive or evaluated honestly.  These people want to control every decision, put their feelings before work, be catered to and applauded for throwing temper tantrums.

Some examples of different leaders who got into trouble trying to be too nice.  For details, see the original article.

  • The staff in one division of a company was unable to form three-person customer service teams because only 15 of 17 people wanted them.
  • At another company, workers were allowed to interrupt senior leader meetings, rudely challenge any decision and make personal attacks on leaders.
  • In an under-performing unit of a third company, a new supervisor evaluating a resistant and mediocre employee saw a five-year history of excellent reviews.

Lack of appropriate leadership at these companies created power vacuums that attracted negative, critical, unhappy and abusive people who wanted control.  Well-meaning leaders had perpetuated the lie that the best way to encourage employee productivity and professional growth was to placate them through sympathy, begging, bribery and allowing them to act out.  These cultures were self-described as “employee centered, caring, consensus and win-win.”

A key initial step in solving the problems was seeing them as cultures of entitlement, appeasement and rule by petulant, demanding “children.”

The workplace is not a therapeutic environment.  Companies do not exist to make us comfortable and happy, or give unconditional approval.  If your feelings are hurt by honest, professional evaluations, prepare for disappointment.  If they’re hurt by differences in responsibility and authority between leaders and followers, become a leader.

We don’t get to vote on everything.  We can’t force everyone to treat us the way we want.  We get rewarded for productivity and success.  We often have to suck it up and be productive when we’d rather not.

Ultimately, companies are in business to make a profit.  Well-meaning leaders who work too hard at being nice, caring people can find themselves carrying 100 percent of the burden to please the most hostile, demanding employees who aren’t contributing to the success of the organization.

Consensus leadership and flat hierarchies are fads that are finally beginning to pass.  They are simply not efficient or effective enough to succeed.

Leaders lead by determining direction, establishing goals and expectations, and judging employees by performance.  Leaders don’t have to be bullies or ogres.  Of course, listening to employees can be a great asset.  But, in the end, leaders are responsible for leading the way so employees can follow.

Often, individuals need coaching and organizations need consulting to help them design and implement a plan that fits the situation.  To get the help you need, call Ben at 1-877-828-5543.

Is the “Passing the Pain Game” costing your company time and money?  Some examples of the game: To read the rest of this article from the Washington Business Journal, see: Passing pain, casting blame cost time and money http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2004/09/13/smallb7.html

For details, see the original article.

  • A customer reams out a salesman.  Part of a job wasn’t done the way the customer wanted.  The salesman doesn’t know what went wrong but he doesn’t want the blame.  He placates the customer by exploding and blaming a department he says was responsible.  He tells the customer he’ll have those people fired.  Then he yells at innocent victims in that department.
  • A new manager is panicking.  He has to present his project to senior leaders on Friday.  It’s Monday morning and he still hasn’t received information from a manager in another department.  He e-mails her and vents his fear and frustration; he harasses, bullies and abuses her.  He tells her he’s tired of begging, he needs the *&@# information right away, he counted on her and she’s let him down.  What the *&@# is wrong with her?  All in capital letters.  To cover his back, he copies his vice-president.
  • A director stomps into a supervisor’s office, scowling along the way and slams the door.  Anxiety and tension spread at the speed of gossip.  People congregate to speculate:  Did she meet with the big bosses yesterday?  Did she get reamed?  Did we mess up?  Who’s going to get blamed next?  Fear spirals, staff finds excuses to be in other areas, productivity tanks.

Other variants are:

  • Some players set up other people to fight.  They plant seeds of doubt and jealousy, and enjoy the bloodletting that follows.
  • Some leaders specialize in negativity, finding fault, bullying and spreading blame when something goes wrong.  Since no one wants to be the victim of mistakes, everyone carries a “blame thrower.”

Is that game familiar? People feel hurt, scared and angry, and inflict their pain on someone else.  The game is also called, “Who has the rattlesnake?”

How much does the game cost? Try this method of calculation:  Estimate the time you’ve spent dealing with uproars, multiply by the number of people who bring their pain to you, multiply again by the number of innocent spectators you and they draw into the ever widening circle of players, factor in salary and productivity wasted.  Add in a fudge factor for your level of frustration.

Pretty large number, isn’t it?

It’s important to have a code of conduct stating that passing the pain and throwing blame is not acceptable.  But that’s not enough.  Most people already know that.  They just don’t follow the code when they’re suffering, scared, angry or supporting friends in a vendetta.

For example, in one training on this subject, some managers questioned why I was wasting their time presenting information they already knew.  So I showed them the e-mails their department heads had given me, in which these same managers had used their blame throwers on each other.  They had perpetuated an intense game that scorched everyone in their departments and all senior leaders.

The trick is to stop the Pass the Pain Game in everyday behavior.  A few suggestions – see the original article for details:

  • Change has to come from the top.
  • Companies point to the culture they want when they publish codes of professional conduct.
  • Policies and codes are not enough.
  • Change begins with individuals committed to adult behavior, and consequences for childish temper tantrums.

Passing the pain and throwing blame are destructive.  Another reason to stop: your boss doesn’t appreciate the pain you’re dumping on him.

Often, individuals need coaching and organizations need consulting to help them design and implement a plan that fits the situation.  To get the help you need, call Ben at 1-877-828-5543.

Attitude is critical.  If your attitude is good, then misunderstandings, disappointments and adversity can be handled professionally and kept from escalating in serious problems. But a poor attitude can turn even minor issues into a job-threatening mess.

To read the rest of this article from the Denver Business Journal, see: Don’t let employee with bad attitude prevail http://denver.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2005/03/14/smallb2.html

For example: Opal was a young employee, new to a well-functioning team.  Her supervisor had already acknowledged that Opal was bright, competent, personable and likely to be a star.  Unfortunately, in Opal’s mind, she already was a star and entitled to celebrity treatment.

Like other team members, Opal was allowed to work four ten-hour days as long as she adjusted her schedule with the rest of the team to ensure coverage at all times.  But Opal rapidly began taking advantage, setting her own schedule without consulting anyone and taking time off at the beginning and end of the day.

These seemed like minor incidents to her supervisor, who reminded Opal of the team agreement about coordinating schedules and pointed out that she was alienating some people.  Opal became visibly upset and argued vehemently that she deserved special treatment.

Opal took a minor, easily fixed issue and escalated it into a big problem.  Opal’s supervisor told her that the agreement to coordinate flextime was the way it was.  Opal retorted that she didn’t like it and her supervisor could expect her to be displeased and show it.

Opal dimmed her own rising star with her bad attitude, made worse because she was so blatantly self-centered and oblivious to team processes.

Opal then reported her displeasure to her boss’s boss.  Later, when Opal’s supervisor took her for coffee, Opal was smug.  She was sure her supervisor had been reprimanded for not handling her the way she wanted.

But Opal’s supervisor hadn’t been reprimanded.  She had a well-deserved reputation for being a considerate, calm person who built highly productive, caring teams - and her boss assumed Opal was the problem.

Opal’s supervisor told her she expected Opal to “display a wonderful attitude toward me and the rest of the team members, whatever your feelings.”

Opal’s supervisor gave her a great gift by having private conversations, being clear about what it took to rise in that company and offering specific advice to help Opal get back on track.

This was a crucial time for Opal.  She hadn’t gotten what she wanted and had thrown a fit.  She’d acted like she did when she was a child facing her mother – using emotional intimidation and bullying to get her way.  If she didn’t change her attitudes, she’d lose her job.

A major test for us is, what do we do when we’ve made mistakes, been reprimanded or been defeated.  Look at the 100 richest people in the world, the 100 greatest people in all of history, the 100 greatest athletes.  They’ve all made mistakes, been dressed down and defeated … and their setbacks have usually been in public.

If you were Opal’s supervisor, what would you do to try to save a potential star?  Some suggestions are: See whole article for details.

  • Meet away from the office for only one heart-to-heart talk about attitudes required for success.
  • Set clear boundaries – “show this behavior or else” - and stick to them.
  • Review the plan with your manager, including a plan if Opal continues going over your head.
  • Hire a coach, for two sessions maximum, so Opal hears what she needs from an outside expert.
  • Don’t give more chances; don’t reward Opal in hopes she’ll like you and act better.
  • Don’t wallow in self-doubt - you wouldn’t get better results if you were sweeter, kinder and gentler. Opal’s mother never did.

Often, individuals need coaching and organizations need consulting to help them design and implement a plan that fits the situation.  To get the help you need, call Ben at 1-877-828-5543.

Some bullying bosses are overt.  They yell, micromanage, criticize relentlessly, make personal remarks, are never satisfied and never promote staff. Other bullies are more covert.

For example, Abby controls her team by making quick decisions and immediately shifting into action.  If you stop to deliberate, she’ll become exasperated and question your intelligence.  Because she’s in a hurry, few people get consulted in advance and things are always done her way. Once she’s made up her mind, she won’t change direction.

To read the rest of this article from the Philadelphia Business Journal, see: Covert bullies like to manage timing of decisions http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/stories/2008/09/08/smallb3.html

Abby tries to control her managerial peers with rapid decisions.  Her arguments for speed can be very persuasive: No one wants to be thought of as “slow or stodgy.”

On the other hand, Alex moves with great deliberation and caution.  He’s just as controlling as Abby, but in the opposite way.  He wants to chew and digest all the details before he’ll decide.  If you want to move rapidly, he’ll become exasperated and question your intelligence and good judgment.  Because he controls the snail’s pace, few people even bother making input anymore.

If he doesn’t want to implement a plan, he’ll say he needs endless information and reflection.  Usually, his deliberations push so hard against deadlines that everyone has to work hectically at the last minute, including weekends.  He doesn’t mind because he’s still in control.

Alex tries to control his managerial peers by delaying decisions.  His arguments defending deliberation and caution can be very persuasive.  No one wants to be labeled “thoughtless or careless.”

People who are concerned with making good decisions will adjust their processes and timing to fit the situation.  Some decisions can be made with extensive input and deliberation, while others demand unilateral and rapid action.  Each style can be successful or have disastrous consequences, depending on the situation.

The rapid responses of many small businesses secured them productive niches while corporate goliaths deliberated.  Similarly, decisions made in the blink of an eye – based on accurate intuition, the hair standing up on the back of your neck or a wrenching in your gut – can save your life or business.  If you wait for proof, it will be too late.

But, of course, we don’t want someone building a bridge or an airplane based on snap decisions.

Be warned: Abby and Alex’s covert, controlling techniques are used just as much between couples in personal life and in family businesses.  However, the same mindset and methods that work to manage peers in corporate life can be effective in those more personal situations.

How you cope with bullies using these styles depends on whether you’re a peer, a supervisee or a supervisor – see complete article for details.

There are no formulas, but there are guidelines.

Often, individuals need coaching and organizations need consulting to help them design and implement a plan that fits the situation.  To get the help you need, call Ben at 1-877-828-5543.

Do you carry a “rattlesnake” in your hand?  Was it thrown at you or did you grab it willingly?  Do you typically throw them at other people? The rattlesnake represents the responsibility to make something happen or to change in order to please somebody else.

To read the rest of this article from the Silicon Valley/San Jose Business Times, see: Eliminate ‘rattlesnakes’ from office interactions http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2005/10/03/smallb4.html

Some bosses hurl rattlesnakes downstreamSome employees toss them upstream to make a supervisor responsible for satisfying them.

One problem is that people usually pretend there’s only one responsible party in any interaction, and they throw the rattlesnake at someone else in order to establish blame and responsibility.  On the other hand, some people gladly take all the rattlesnakes and let the other person off the hook – as if they feel guilty for any imperfection or they enjoy being martyrs.  Then they have the burden of coping with rattlesnakes forever because interactions continue escalating.

But, in most interactions, personal and business, there are usually many rattlesnakes.

For example, at a team meeting, Kathy got hurt and angry when Peter said he hadn’t gotten a necessary document from her.  She fought back tears, scowled, crossed her arms, clenched her fists and swiveled her chair so her back was to the group.  Peter said he was sorry – he hadn’t meant to imply that she was incompetent.

How many rattlesnakes were there and who had them?  See the original article for more information and assessment.

Another example: Ellen got straight to the point in her performance evaluation of Glenn – she was frustrated.  He was technically skilled but he resisted change and pushed back loudly and repeatedly in meetings about why the team couldn’t do what it needed to do.

Glenn told Ellen that he didn’t like her style of managing and evaluating.  He felt disrespected and threatened because she was brusque, and that’s why he got defensive.  Good management, he said, meant that Ellen should adjust her approach to the preferred styles of each individual in the group.

How many rattlesnakes were there and who had them?  See the original article for more information and assessment.

When it gets to the stage of anger, people focus on their emotions instead of the work that must be done.  Harassment, bullying and abuse inevitably follow.

You can start de-escalating by doing the natural things: Don’t throw rattlesnakes and if someone tries to hand you one, don’t take it.

Great leaders don’t allow rattlesnake-tossing contests; they’re just a waste of time and energy.

Often, people need coaching to help them overcome their defensiveness and passive-aggressive tendencies, and to build the strength, courage, determination and skill needed to stop angry confrontations and to emerge as the obvious candidate for promotion.  To get the help you need, call Ben at 1-877-828-5543.

We all know micro-managers who need to back off.  But just as often, I see employees who refuse to accept accountability and supervision.  They want absolute control of their turf and will resist, sabotage and badmouth any supervisor who wants to integrate them into an effective team. For example, Rita, a high-ranking professional, goes over Tom, her direct supervisor, to complain to a senior manager that Tom is micromanaging and wasting her time, so she can’t complete her tasks.  Rita also complains that Tom doesn’t inform her of meetings, springs deadlines on her without warning and talks down to her.

To read the rest of this article from the Memphis Business Journal, see: Don’t let turf controllers undercut authority behind the scenes http://www.bizjournals.com/memphis/stories/2008/09/29/smallb2.html

We found that Rita simply didn’t want any oversight.  There were records of calls and e-mails documenting timely announcements of meetings, requests for her to attend meetings, and clarity in expressing tasks and timelines that she pretended she didn’t know about.  She also hadn’t return calls so she could say later that she misunderstood assignments and timelines, had good-sounding excuses to avoid meetings where she’d have to report progress and had never brought her issues to Tom.  Instead, she had badmouthed him behind his back to other managers and employees.

She sabotaged, harassed, bullied and abused him behind his back.  She tried to form a clique to disparage and undermine him with her constant negativity.

What could Tom do?

What should the senior manager do?

Call Ben to learn what you can do to eliminate the high cost of turf controllers’ low attitudesAll tactics are situational.  Expert coaching and consulting can help you create and implement a plan that fits you and your organization.

Good managers don’t clean up messes caused by their staffs.  They prevent messes from happening. Carl, head of a division, finally had to fix the problems in a department run by a senior manager, Brenda.  He transferred one supervisor and three high-ranking staff members to other departments.  He was satisfied: once again, he showed that he could be decisive and clean house.

But Carl had consistently ignored my advice that the head of that department was a problem.  Even with the housecleaning, he didn’t make the changes necessary to keep the problems from resurfacing later.

To read the rest of this article from the Jacksonville Business Journal, see: Managers must be decisive in handling problems http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2009/02/02/smallb5.html

I discovered a dark side behind Brenda’s behavior.  She was both conflict avoidant and passive-aggressive.

Carl’s permissiveness allowed Brenda to create a toxic culture of conflict-avoidance and passive-aggressiveness that diminished productivity throughout her department.  Abusive, harassing, bullying, unprofessional behavior included back-stabbing, innuendos, rumors, negativity and warring cliques; leading to widespread paranoia and over-reactions.

Carl and Benda ignored the widespread evidence that some people simply didn’t like each other and wouldn’t collaborate, and that for some people, personal agendas took precedence over company goals.  Also, some people behave decently only when they are actually held accountable by meaningful consequences.  Real-world bullies won’t behave, no matter what.

Carl and Brenda wouldn’t hold staff accountable in any consistent and meaningful way.

Learn what you can do to eliminate the high cost of conflict-avoidant, passive-aggressive low attitudes of managers and staff.

All tactics are situational.  Expert coaching and consulting can help you create and implement a plan that fits you and your organization.